Gender
- Thread starter River
- Start date
River
Well-known member
For at least half of my now long life (I'm in my early fifties) I've been saying, on occasion, that I'm "inwardly androgynous," by which I have meant that while I wear guy clothing and eschew makeup and high heals … and otherwise appear as 'masculine', I feel about equal portions 'masculine' and 'feminine'.
True, my hips probably swish a little more than those of the hypermasculine man, but I figure I generally pass as a regular dude. I don't appear to be effeminate -- whatever exactly that means.
We are living in a time when same sex marriage is becoming increasingly ubiquitous and normal, when het boys wear pink shirts and have earrings … and with increasing frequency will cuddle one another and even kiss, telling one another how much they love one another, sending text messages with little bright red hearts (at least in the UK they do, and there is solid sociological evidence for this. Even in the USA the old gender binary and its codes are disappearing before our very eyes, along with sex-and-gender segregated restaurant and school bathrooms.
We commonly hear these days that some cultures have had three, four, six, ten genders. We hear that sex and gender are two different things, and we believe it. Why wouldn't we. It's rather obvious -- isn't it?
Well... ultimately, no. Not so much. Which has us suspecting that gender is -- gasp! -- nothing more than a social construct … of such cultural variability that it makes our head spin if we actually do try to put any handles on any of it.
And that's okay. Gender appears not really to be 'real' in any substantial kind of way, like a mountain is real, or a tree. Gender is real more like how the border between Mexico and the USA is real. It's all made up, but sort of quasi-real in that making it up has very real consequences.
Something is happening these days, though. We're seeing through the illusions of gender as we never have before. And this is the equivalent of a psychic seismic earthquake of about 9 points on the Richter scale. Or a tsunami, or perhaps only a slow but giant flood.
The same thing, of course, is beginning to happen with regard to "love" -- as we see so much evidence for here in polyamory.com . The old maps and legends of 'love' are … falling away. "True love" needn't be exclusive, as it was thought to be for so long by "normal" people. Abnormality is breaking out everywhere! And this is a good thing, I believe. We're becoming free in all kinds of new and exciting ways. Freedom is breaking out! At least in some places, at certain times.
I just had to momentarily segue from the topic of gender to the topic of polyamory -- because this is a polyamory forum. And polyamory is partly about love and partly about sex -- and partly in terms of both senses of the word 'sex' -- biological sex and … most everyone's favorite recreational activity. But there's more to it than that, my reasons for tying gender inquiry into polyamory inquiry. And it has to do with the difference between a real tree, a real mountain, and a real (though purely imaginary -- in some important sense) national border.
If we all decide to redraw the USA/Mexico border somewhere other than where it is, along most of its length (sans any walls or fences) … nothing will seem to have changed much on the ground. Apart from the movements of people. It's rather arbitrary, this placement of borders. What makes a border 'real' is that we agree to it.
So I ask you, what makes gender real? Apart from sex, that is.
It seems to be a question that matters because we live -- still -- in a deeply gendered world. Right?
True, my hips probably swish a little more than those of the hypermasculine man, but I figure I generally pass as a regular dude. I don't appear to be effeminate -- whatever exactly that means.
We are living in a time when same sex marriage is becoming increasingly ubiquitous and normal, when het boys wear pink shirts and have earrings … and with increasing frequency will cuddle one another and even kiss, telling one another how much they love one another, sending text messages with little bright red hearts (at least in the UK they do, and there is solid sociological evidence for this. Even in the USA the old gender binary and its codes are disappearing before our very eyes, along with sex-and-gender segregated restaurant and school bathrooms.
We commonly hear these days that some cultures have had three, four, six, ten genders. We hear that sex and gender are two different things, and we believe it. Why wouldn't we. It's rather obvious -- isn't it?
Well... ultimately, no. Not so much. Which has us suspecting that gender is -- gasp! -- nothing more than a social construct … of such cultural variability that it makes our head spin if we actually do try to put any handles on any of it.
And that's okay. Gender appears not really to be 'real' in any substantial kind of way, like a mountain is real, or a tree. Gender is real more like how the border between Mexico and the USA is real. It's all made up, but sort of quasi-real in that making it up has very real consequences.
Something is happening these days, though. We're seeing through the illusions of gender as we never have before. And this is the equivalent of a psychic seismic earthquake of about 9 points on the Richter scale. Or a tsunami, or perhaps only a slow but giant flood.
The same thing, of course, is beginning to happen with regard to "love" -- as we see so much evidence for here in polyamory.com . The old maps and legends of 'love' are … falling away. "True love" needn't be exclusive, as it was thought to be for so long by "normal" people. Abnormality is breaking out everywhere! And this is a good thing, I believe. We're becoming free in all kinds of new and exciting ways. Freedom is breaking out! At least in some places, at certain times.
I just had to momentarily segue from the topic of gender to the topic of polyamory -- because this is a polyamory forum. And polyamory is partly about love and partly about sex -- and partly in terms of both senses of the word 'sex' -- biological sex and … most everyone's favorite recreational activity. But there's more to it than that, my reasons for tying gender inquiry into polyamory inquiry. And it has to do with the difference between a real tree, a real mountain, and a real (though purely imaginary -- in some important sense) national border.
If we all decide to redraw the USA/Mexico border somewhere other than where it is, along most of its length (sans any walls or fences) … nothing will seem to have changed much on the ground. Apart from the movements of people. It's rather arbitrary, this placement of borders. What makes a border 'real' is that we agree to it.
So I ask you, what makes gender real? Apart from sex, that is.
It seems to be a question that matters because we live -- still -- in a deeply gendered world. Right?
River
Well-known member
What Is Gender Identity?
The elusive true gender self
https://arcdigital.media/what-is-gender-identity-10ce0da71999
The elusive true gender self
https://arcdigital.media/what-is-gender-identity-10ce0da71999
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=contrapoints
I really like this person's intellectual sociological delvings into the gender question (and other topics as well). I think you will too, River.
I really like this person's intellectual sociological delvings into the gender question (and other topics as well). I think you will too, River.
Difficult topic.
I know two people with gender problems one of them a total piece of shit male to female.
Used to be a nice person till he started drinking. Got sober again and told about his gender problems got in transition being a nice person again and started drinking again and got a total piece of shit again, really hurt her parents and pushed away all her friends.
Other guy really nice beautiful boy who I had fell I love with once.
We are both married so nothing else than kissing happened.
Has started hormone therapy last month.
Think of them both as brave people.
But I just can't understand them not having the same feelings.
Can't get my head around that you feel so wrong in your body.
Than there are people who don't feel man or woman.
This completely freaks me out how is this posible. Can't get a mental image how that must feel. For what I understand this must be very frustrating.
For me being bisexual has been a struggle.
Can't imagine how difficult it is to be dealing with gender problems.
All people feeling this feelings wish you a lot of understanding friends an family.
Hope the world will change and be more open.
You have my greatest respect.
I know two people with gender problems one of them a total piece of shit male to female.
Used to be a nice person till he started drinking. Got sober again and told about his gender problems got in transition being a nice person again and started drinking again and got a total piece of shit again, really hurt her parents and pushed away all her friends.
Other guy really nice beautiful boy who I had fell I love with once.
We are both married so nothing else than kissing happened.
Has started hormone therapy last month.
Think of them both as brave people.
But I just can't understand them not having the same feelings.
Can't get my head around that you feel so wrong in your body.
Than there are people who don't feel man or woman.
This completely freaks me out how is this posible. Can't get a mental image how that must feel. For what I understand this must be very frustrating.
For me being bisexual has been a struggle.
Can't imagine how difficult it is to be dealing with gender problems.
All people feeling this feelings wish you a lot of understanding friends an family.
Hope the world will change and be more open.
You have my greatest respect.
they
Do you mean chromosome sex, or coital sex? Because I became super comfy with my gender once I started exploring the latter.
I was a tomboy as a kid who, once I learned about sex, imagined having a penis so I could *do that like that* and there's still no way I'll ever be full on stereotypically female. But I embraced being female when I started coupling mostly, but not exclusively, with guys. Either way, I still cum like a female (with stimulus that suits this female body.). I love this female body for the pleasure it can bring, and I don't love it for a bunch of rather typically female reasons (because I am not impervious to beauty standards).
But I'm absolutely, undoubtedly female. And preferring the company if boys when I was a kid carried into adulthood. I just play different games now.
Do you mean chromosome sex, or coital sex? Because I became super comfy with my gender once I started exploring the latter.
I was a tomboy as a kid who, once I learned about sex, imagined having a penis so I could *do that like that* and there's still no way I'll ever be full on stereotypically female. But I embraced being female when I started coupling mostly, but not exclusively, with guys. Either way, I still cum like a female (with stimulus that suits this female body.). I love this female body for the pleasure it can bring, and I don't love it for a bunch of rather typically female reasons (because I am not impervious to beauty standards).
But I'm absolutely, undoubtedly female. And preferring the company if boys when I was a kid carried into adulthood. I just play different games now.
Last edited:
FallenAngelina
Well-known member
"Total piece of shit" is unrelated to the transgender discussion. Alcoholism is an equal opportunity destroyer.
Her parents brother friends hoped that coming out changed her and this happend for a few years.
The alcoholism killed the person who was liked and loved.
Not the transition.
So you're right it has nothing to do with gender being a nice person.
In Holland we used to have quite good health care for trans people but the insurance companies and political situation cut a great deal of the funds.
For what I experienced in some professional environments trans people are excepted.
But not every where.
Due to TV show s some people still think its a freak show.
JaneQSmythe
Well-known member
I have to admit that gender-identity issues are something that I wish I understood better, because I do have trouble conceptualizing the issues when I consider them in relation to my own self. Watching the "Intersexion" documentary really did provide me with a lot of food for thought, however - in terms of how society interacts with people who don't match our preconceptions.
Right. Or at least that is how it seems to me. But I don't have any particular gender-related issues to contend with.
I have a female body. It's not perfect, it's not horrid, it's the body that I live in, it works ok (except for the making babies part). I enjoy having it (a body). But most of the time I don't really think about it.
Having a female body doesn't dictate who I can love or who I am attracted to... or how I have to behave. No one is requiring me to do my hair, wear make-up, shave my legs, like jewelry, wear heels, wear a bra, or keep quiet during meetings - and I don't do ANY of these things. BUT, I think that a large part of this has to be all of the OTHER privileges that I enjoy as a white, middle-class, American being born into MY particular family in an era when this was becoming acceptable. So ... being a "tomboy" was never presented to me as being anything other than a "positive" ("Good for you!").
It disturbs me that there are people who don't feel comfortable in their own bodies, when I suspect (as River discussed) that it because of external forces telling them that they are "doing it wrong". That there are people that don't "feel" man or woman doesn't really bother me - because I don't really understand what that means exactly. I mean, I have a female-type body, I feel like ME - so how would I know how I would feel differently if I had a male-type body? I've never had one (I'm not opposed to the idea, I just don't feel compelled to make it happen!).
I can't identify (personally) with someone who wants a penis that they don't have, or hates the breasts and vagina that they do. For me (again, personally) that seems like a larger scale version of wishing that I had blue eyes, or curly hair, or wasn't short. (OK, you can get colored contacts and a perm pretty easy - but my 5-foot-2 self is ain't NEVER gonna be 6 feet tall!).
Being bisexual was never particularly a struggle for me - but, again, I think that is largely a cultural construct - it is more socially acceptable for females to be bisexual than men in many societies.
I'm not sure what you mean by chromosome sex - maybe "biological gender"? (which is not as straightforward as many assume - hence "intersexed".)
By "coital sex" I think that you mean - sex as an action, regardless of gender/orientation etc?
So having sexual relations made you MORE comfortable with your perceived gender? (I do know a number of women who became LESS comfortable with being female after the avalanche of implications and expectations revolving around female sexuality descended upon them!)
I imagine that many males ALSO appreciate the pleasure that their bodies can bring - but how would I know if theirs was more or less than what I experience? Would men not also have "typical male reasons" for not loving their male bodies (also not being impervious to "handsome/sexy" standards for men? - or, you know, dick size?).
Well, yes, same here! But I don't know that we are talking about the same things. Outside of the bedroom (where I am fine with male and female play/interactions) - I find more enjoyment at "beating men at their own game" than playing the social games that women are expected to play. (Although, at times, I ponder whether the men feel the need to "pull their punches" when competing against a woman in male-dominated games - they needn't bother, I will beat them regardless! But if THAT'S the story they need to tell themselves...
)
(Obviously, I am talking about intellectual competition here - I'm 5-foot-3, 45 years old, and not particularly in-shape - ANYONE can kick my ass in a physical competition! - outside of the bedroom.)
************************
Sorry for the rambling - "stream of consciousness" typing at play...
Right. Or at least that is how it seems to me. But I don't have any particular gender-related issues to contend with.
I have a female body. It's not perfect, it's not horrid, it's the body that I live in, it works ok (except for the making babies part). I enjoy having it (a body). But most of the time I don't really think about it.
Having a female body doesn't dictate who I can love or who I am attracted to... or how I have to behave. No one is requiring me to do my hair, wear make-up, shave my legs, like jewelry, wear heels, wear a bra, or keep quiet during meetings - and I don't do ANY of these things. BUT, I think that a large part of this has to be all of the OTHER privileges that I enjoy as a white, middle-class, American being born into MY particular family in an era when this was becoming acceptable. So ... being a "tomboy" was never presented to me as being anything other than a "positive" ("Good for you!").
It disturbs me that there are people who don't feel comfortable in their own bodies, when I suspect (as River discussed) that it because of external forces telling them that they are "doing it wrong". That there are people that don't "feel" man or woman doesn't really bother me - because I don't really understand what that means exactly. I mean, I have a female-type body, I feel like ME - so how would I know how I would feel differently if I had a male-type body? I've never had one (I'm not opposed to the idea, I just don't feel compelled to make it happen!).
I can't identify (personally) with someone who wants a penis that they don't have, or hates the breasts and vagina that they do. For me (again, personally) that seems like a larger scale version of wishing that I had blue eyes, or curly hair, or wasn't short. (OK, you can get colored contacts and a perm pretty easy - but my 5-foot-2 self is ain't NEVER gonna be 6 feet tall!).
Being bisexual was never particularly a struggle for me - but, again, I think that is largely a cultural construct - it is more socially acceptable for females to be bisexual than men in many societies.
I'm not sure what you mean by chromosome sex - maybe "biological gender"? (which is not as straightforward as many assume - hence "intersexed".)
By "coital sex" I think that you mean - sex as an action, regardless of gender/orientation etc?
So having sexual relations made you MORE comfortable with your perceived gender? (I do know a number of women who became LESS comfortable with being female after the avalanche of implications and expectations revolving around female sexuality descended upon them!)
I imagine that many males ALSO appreciate the pleasure that their bodies can bring - but how would I know if theirs was more or less than what I experience? Would men not also have "typical male reasons" for not loving their male bodies (also not being impervious to "handsome/sexy" standards for men? - or, you know, dick size?).
Well, yes, same here! But I don't know that we are talking about the same things. Outside of the bedroom (where I am fine with male and female play/interactions) - I find more enjoyment at "beating men at their own game" than playing the social games that women are expected to play. (Although, at times, I ponder whether the men feel the need to "pull their punches" when competing against a woman in male-dominated games - they needn't bother, I will beat them regardless! But if THAT'S the story they need to tell themselves...
)(Obviously, I am talking about intellectual competition here - I'm 5-foot-3, 45 years old, and not particularly in-shape - ANYONE can kick my ass in a physical competition! - outside of the bedroom.)
************************
Sorry for the rambling - "stream of consciousness" typing at play...
Last edited:
Ergo, chromosomal sex, since "biological gender" is an oxymoron these days. If we're thinking about it at XY, XX, or XXY (or XXX or XYY) level, then we can acknowledge something that is now recognised as quite separate from gender.
Yep, sexual relations made a significant contribution to me embracing being female. But I appreciate that some people find the opposite.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're getting at here. I can't possibly compare my experience of sexual pleasure to a man's because I can't ever know what they feel precisely (as much as my imagination used to do its best). I have never considered that they'd have more or less pleasure in sex based on their sex organs. I just meant I liked what I felt and found a whole new appreciation for my female body.
Chess can be excellent foreplay
I can't help but wonder much of the notion of genderqueer is a reaction to the stereotypical depictions of boy things and girl things. I originally wrote "increasingly stereotypical" with thoughts of pink lego and the influence of Disney. But gender roles used to be far more rigid than they are now, even if it wasn't so fricken princess based. Still, without a degree in gender studies, I can't possibly discuss the deconstruction of femininity and masculinity over the past 100 years
vinsanity0
Active member
I think a degree in gender studies would only serve to alter your sense of reality.. Still, without a degree in gender studies, I can't possibly discuss the deconstruction of femininity and masculinity over the past 100 years
Hahahaha, hence my attempt at irony.
JaneQSmythe
Well-known member
Warning: Biologist talking!
Ah, see - I guess I don't know that a chromosomal analysis actually adds much to the picture with regards to gender and sexual identity, as the variations in expression of the SAME chromosomal pattern can vary considerably while DIFFERENT chromosomal patterns can express almost identically.
XO, XX, XXX, or XY-with testicular feminization syndrome: will all produce a female morphology* (vagina/internal gonads); whereas XY, XXY and XYY: will all produce a male morphology* (penis/external gonads). From a strictly biological perspective, the only determinant is whether or not there is a functioning Y chromosome. (For completeness: OY is not compatible with life.)
None of which has much (or anything at all) to do with a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. (There are other effects - on fertility, associated medical disorders, intellectual or learning disabilities, etc. - for men/women/other with sex chromosome associated syndromes.)
Intersexed people and people born with ambiguous genitalia may have any of the chromosomal combinations or a "mosaicism" (where some cells have one combo and other cells have a different combo). Often (aside from mosaicism) this results from congenital (in utero events that affect the pregnancy) as opposed to genetic (innate in the chromosomes) factors. Again this does not particularly determine sexual orientation or gender identity (or lack thereof).
******************************************
*Morphology, for clarification, in biology, simply means the "shape" (structure or form) of an organism. Another relevant biological concept is genotype (what genes an organism has) vs. phenotype (how those genes are, or are not, expressed in observable ways).
Further info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype%E2%80%93phenotype_distinction
/end biology lecture
Ah, see - I guess I don't know that a chromosomal analysis actually adds much to the picture with regards to gender and sexual identity, as the variations in expression of the SAME chromosomal pattern can vary considerably while DIFFERENT chromosomal patterns can express almost identically.
XO, XX, XXX, or XY-with testicular feminization syndrome: will all produce a female morphology* (vagina/internal gonads); whereas XY, XXY and XYY: will all produce a male morphology* (penis/external gonads). From a strictly biological perspective, the only determinant is whether or not there is a functioning Y chromosome. (For completeness: OY is not compatible with life.)
None of which has much (or anything at all) to do with a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. (There are other effects - on fertility, associated medical disorders, intellectual or learning disabilities, etc. - for men/women/other with sex chromosome associated syndromes.)
Intersexed people and people born with ambiguous genitalia may have any of the chromosomal combinations or a "mosaicism" (where some cells have one combo and other cells have a different combo). Often (aside from mosaicism) this results from congenital (in utero events that affect the pregnancy) as opposed to genetic (innate in the chromosomes) factors. Again this does not particularly determine sexual orientation or gender identity (or lack thereof).
******************************************
*Morphology, for clarification, in biology, simply means the "shape" (structure or form) of an organism. Another relevant biological concept is genotype (what genes an organism has) vs. phenotype (how those genes are, or are not, expressed in observable ways).
Further info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype%E2%80%93phenotype_distinction
/end biology lecture
Last edited:
So that's a very comprehensive reply to River's original question, "what makes gender real then? Apart from sex."
My original response indicated that the act of coitus made my gender very real to me. It was a significant factor in me embracing my womanhood.
I think we agree, Jane, that chromosomes do not determine gender, but then, that's also pretty much accepted as a given nowadays where I live. River's qualification "apart from sex" no longer holds true for biological sex as a determinant of gender.
As an aside, we had an older intersex generally male presenting person come to a few of our local munches. He explained his increasing interest in presenting as female and was reassured that he could present however he wished (so long as he was still wearing day wear and not fetish wear.) He divulged once that he was wearing a bra under his clothes, and I replied with a "good on ya, whatever makes you comfortable" which was apparently the wrong thing. He struggled with us not being shocked by something he found so difficult to inch toward. I hope he found people that gave him the kind of support he wanted.
My original response indicated that the act of coitus made my gender very real to me. It was a significant factor in me embracing my womanhood.
I think we agree, Jane, that chromosomes do not determine gender, but then, that's also pretty much accepted as a given nowadays where I live. River's qualification "apart from sex" no longer holds true for biological sex as a determinant of gender.
As an aside, we had an older intersex generally male presenting person come to a few of our local munches. He explained his increasing interest in presenting as female and was reassured that he could present however he wished (so long as he was still wearing day wear and not fetish wear.) He divulged once that he was wearing a bra under his clothes, and I replied with a "good on ya, whatever makes you comfortable" which was apparently the wrong thing. He struggled with us not being shocked by something he found so difficult to inch toward. I hope he found people that gave him the kind of support he wanted.
River
Well-known member
That may be so, but even the current technical meanings of the words "gender" and "sex" (biological) -- as we use them nowadays -- are very new arrivals in history. Whatever folks called them in the long ago, there were boys and girls, men and women (and perhaps something in between) long before these words and their current meanings came on the scene. Which makes me wonder... did anything similar to the modern concept of gender exist in European civilization (and elsewhere) 500 and 1,000 years ago?
Also, it's worth pointing out that it is now commonly agreed upon that gender and biological sex are decidedly not the same thing, so there's no need to wonder how chromosomes might fit in with "gender," per se.
When I was a boy, pretty much everyone in my society simply "knew" that a boy was a boy and a girl was a girl, that the first was a male and the second was a female, and that biological sex simply WAS one's gender. Sex and gender were basically used interchangeably and as synonyms.
Nothing much has changed except with regard to what the word "gender" has come to mean and the effects of that change on culture -- which has been rather immense, it seems.
River
Well-known member
Chess can be excellent foreplay
I can't help but wonder much of the notion of genderqueer is a reaction to the stereotypical depictions of boy things and girl things. I originally wrote "increasingly stereotypical" with thoughts of pink lego and the influence of Disney. But gender roles used to be far more rigid than they are now, even if it wasn't so fricken princess based. Still, without a degree in gender studies, I can't possibly discuss the deconstruction of femininity and masculinity over the past 100 years
This line of inquiry made me wonder if perhaps what we call "gender" is best principally understood, anthropologically, as a set of culturally prescribed rituals in which the ritual traditionally permeates everyday life, rather than just at set moments (e.g., upon the full or new moon, at dawn or dusk). What may be happening is that we're finding these rituals less and less … necessary or useful.
River
Well-known member
A few days ago I was reading Norman Fisher on the classical Chinese concept of mind. Norman Fischer is an American poet, writer, and Soto Zen priest, teaching and practicing in the lineage of Shunryu Suzuki.
Zen, of course, is the Japanese rendering of Ch'an, which is the original "Zen" in that Ch'an is the ancestor of all "Zen" traditions. It just so happens that we now call these various traditions "Zen," whether they are found in China, Vietnam, Korea, etc.... (It is an accident of history.)
Anyway, the term and concept "mind" would seem to be simple and clear, right? But it is no more clear than the concept of gender. (Actually, it appears much murkier and unclear than the concept of gender.)
I wish I could locate the particular writing online which I read from Fisher the other day. He was describing the classical sense of xin (the heart-mind). Nearly everything about xin differs from what we modern Westerners mean by "mind" -- its location, it's basic properties..., and yet when popular books on Zen appear in English we see it written as "mind".
I want to understand what the classical Chinese meant by xin. But that's going to take a lot of work! Xin is not just in the head, it's equally in the world outside our skins as it is interior to ourselves. It's not just cognitive in nature, but also and equally feeling in nature. And there are many other mysteries about xin that I'm just way too new to to begin to think clearly or talk about.
It seems to me that to really understand xin one would have to largely, if temporarily and provisionally, lose one's "mind". That is, one would have to be able to consider both the concepts and the actuality of "mind" as something like an archipelago of "mind"edness … and be willing and able to sail between these many islands of "mind," not just "thinking" about each, but also feeling them and entering into their experience and orientation on things, minds, the cosmos....
I hope I needn't be explicit on what this has to do with our discussion about gender. There is an unspoken, implicity here which, for now, I hardly know how to speak. The Tao which can be spoken is, after all, not the eternal Tao.
Xin - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xin_(concept)
Zen, of course, is the Japanese rendering of Ch'an, which is the original "Zen" in that Ch'an is the ancestor of all "Zen" traditions. It just so happens that we now call these various traditions "Zen," whether they are found in China, Vietnam, Korea, etc.... (It is an accident of history.)
Anyway, the term and concept "mind" would seem to be simple and clear, right? But it is no more clear than the concept of gender. (Actually, it appears much murkier and unclear than the concept of gender.)
I wish I could locate the particular writing online which I read from Fisher the other day. He was describing the classical sense of xin (the heart-mind). Nearly everything about xin differs from what we modern Westerners mean by "mind" -- its location, it's basic properties..., and yet when popular books on Zen appear in English we see it written as "mind".
I want to understand what the classical Chinese meant by xin. But that's going to take a lot of work! Xin is not just in the head, it's equally in the world outside our skins as it is interior to ourselves. It's not just cognitive in nature, but also and equally feeling in nature. And there are many other mysteries about xin that I'm just way too new to to begin to think clearly or talk about.
It seems to me that to really understand xin one would have to largely, if temporarily and provisionally, lose one's "mind". That is, one would have to be able to consider both the concepts and the actuality of "mind" as something like an archipelago of "mind"edness … and be willing and able to sail between these many islands of "mind," not just "thinking" about each, but also feeling them and entering into their experience and orientation on things, minds, the cosmos....
I hope I needn't be explicit on what this has to do with our discussion about gender. There is an unspoken, implicity here which, for now, I hardly know how to speak. The Tao which can be spoken is, after all, not the eternal Tao.
Xin - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xin_(concept)
Last edited:
vinsanity0
Active member
Biological sex and gender are the same thing. It is gender roles and display that can be considered a social construct.
It should be mentioned that there are reasons for social constructs. That needs to be understood if you want to change them.
I was born in 1962. I was very impressionable in the late sixties/early seventies. That happens to coincide with the rise of feminism. It was the feminists who were talking about gender roles. It was still binary though. Women didn't say they wanted careers because they wanted to be men. Women wanted careers because they were women who wanted careers.
This also mean that men didn't have to be be super masculine. Like River, I wasn't into wearing dresses or makeup. I did grow my hair long, dressed a little androgynously, was more into cooking and gardening than sports. I've still always thought of myself as a guy though. So what's different? I don't suffer from gender dysphoria.
Gender dysphoria is how we arrive at "non-binary". The most obvious form of gender dysphoria is transgenderism. However, dysphoria is on a spectrum. Some dysphoric people are only uncomfortable with pronouns, others are uncomfortable with various parts of their bodies, or their voice, etc. It is unknown what causes dysphoria or how to treat it. The suggestion is to just go with it.
Intersex has been mentioned. Intersex people are a very small sample. That really isn't a part of the discussion. I will say I think intersex people are the only people who are assigned a gender at birth.
So what's this all mean? Nothing...lol. I'm a firm believer that we should just accept people for how they are. We also shouldn't worry too much about what other people think. There's always going to be someone who hates on people who are different.
It should be mentioned that there are reasons for social constructs. That needs to be understood if you want to change them.
I was born in 1962. I was very impressionable in the late sixties/early seventies. That happens to coincide with the rise of feminism. It was the feminists who were talking about gender roles. It was still binary though. Women didn't say they wanted careers because they wanted to be men. Women wanted careers because they were women who wanted careers.
This also mean that men didn't have to be be super masculine. Like River, I wasn't into wearing dresses or makeup. I did grow my hair long, dressed a little androgynously, was more into cooking and gardening than sports. I've still always thought of myself as a guy though. So what's different? I don't suffer from gender dysphoria.
Gender dysphoria is how we arrive at "non-binary". The most obvious form of gender dysphoria is transgenderism. However, dysphoria is on a spectrum. Some dysphoric people are only uncomfortable with pronouns, others are uncomfortable with various parts of their bodies, or their voice, etc. It is unknown what causes dysphoria or how to treat it. The suggestion is to just go with it.
Intersex has been mentioned. Intersex people are a very small sample. That really isn't a part of the discussion. I will say I think intersex people are the only people who are assigned a gender at birth.
So what's this all mean? Nothing...lol. I'm a firm believer that we should just accept people for how they are. We also shouldn't worry too much about what other people think. There's always going to be someone who hates on people who are different.
JaneQSmythe
Well-known member
I was the one that brought intersex into the conversation (because I find the topic fascinating and relevant to a discussion of gender), but you are welcome to dismiss it. I would point out, however, that intersex is probably not as UNcommon as many people assume - it is just not generally something that people disclose except in certain settings. According to the Intersex Campaign for Equality the term could apply to 1.7% of the population - approximately the same prevalence as red-headedness.
Ref: https://www.intersexequality.com/how-common-is-intersex-in-humans/